Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
7 . The first respondent filed a counter to the claim of the petitioner on 2.9.2011.
Apart from filing a counter to the claim of the petitioner, the first respondent also
filed an independent Statement of Counter Claim on the very same date. In the
Counter Claim, the first respondent sought the following reliefs:
"(i) To declare that the Employment Agreement dated 10.3.2007 is null and
void ab initio and the Claimant is liable to refund all payments (Rs.
93,50,948) received by her during her employment with the Respondent
Company along with interest calculated at the rate of 9% per annum from the
dates of various payments till refund is made.
(ii) To direct the Claimant to refund the deposit made by the Respondent
Company with her in the sum of Rs. 1.55 crore along with interest calculated
at the rate of 9% per annum from the dates of various payments till refund is
made and
(iii) To direct the Claimant to pay the Respondent the sum of Rs.
32,00,00,000/- along with interest calculated at the rate of 9% per annum
from the date of the institution of the instant claim till payment."
8. The petitioner filed a counter to the first respondent's counter claim and the first
respondent filed a rejoinder to the petitioner's counter.
9 . Thereafter, the second respondent-Arbitrator commenced the proceedings at
Chennai. A preliminary meeting was held on 21.11.2011 for the purpose of marking
the documents on either side and for the process of admission and denial. On the
date of the preliminary hearing, both parties agreed that there would be no oral
evidence and that the matter will be decided only on mutually accepted documentary
evidence.
10. On the next date of hearing viz., 17.3.2012, the learned counsel on both sides
argued the question of admissibility of the documents denied by the first respondent.
Thereafter, the Arbitrator decided to proceed to hear the arguments on merits,
keeping the objections relating to admissibility of documents in mind. The learned
Arbitrator decided to take up the question of admissibility whenever the disputed
In other words, the Arbitrator accepted only one head of claim, namely severance
benefit and awarded a sum of Rs. 1,68,00,000/-. However, the Arbitrator also stated
that since the first respondent retained this benefit with them, he was rounding off
the amount to Rs. 2.00 Crores. Since the first respondent had already deposited some
amount, in pursuance of the order of the Supreme Court, the Arbitrator directed the
said amount to be deducted and the balance to be paid with interest at 18% per
annum from 01.4.2012. The first respondent was also directed to give a no objection
certificate indicating that it was a contractual termination as recognised in the
industry, so as not to come in the way of the petitioner's future employment.
12. Aggrieved by the rejection of all the heads of claim except one, by the Arbitrator,
the petitioner has come up with the above petition under Section 34. The first
respondent has not chosen to challenge either the Award passed in favour of the
petitioner or the rejection of all their counter claims by the learned Arbitrator. With
this brief outline, let me now proceed to minute details.
13. The grievance of the petitioner can be summarised as follows:--
"(i) The claims under Serial Nos. 1 to 4 in the table given above, have been
admitted by the Arbitrator and hence the petitioner has no grievance in
respect of the same.
(ii) The fifth head of claim, according to the petitioner, was not considered
by the Arbitrator at all. But the first respondent claims that what was
awarded under the first four heads of claim includes the fifth claim also.
(iii) The sixth head of claim for compensation for failure of the company to
transfer the petitioner to USA, was rejected by the Arbitrator, on the ground
that though there was a breach of contract, no separate compensation other